<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for Maingauche</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/Maingauche/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/Maingauche/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Dec 2010 03:08:55 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: How would you change Nokia's N8?</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/24/how-would-you-change-nokias-n8/#comment-118979123</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Meego.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 25 Dec 2010 03:08:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Debit Cards and Capitalism</title><link>http://motherjones.com/node/92246#comment-115094553</link><description>&lt;p&gt;If you had actually read the article, you would have understood that businesses are contractually not allowed to transfer their debit card fees to the consumer. So, either the costs aren't being transferred and it is a benefit to consumers or they are being transferred and the article is moot.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Way to be a tool.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 20 Dec 2010 00:24:04 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Debit Cards and Capitalism</title><link>http://motherjones.com/node/92246#comment-114580087</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Let me get this straight ... MJ is arguing for allowing businesses to transfer more of their costs to customers? GTFOH.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 18 Dec 2010 20:06:23 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Netflix ported WebKit to the PS3 to enable HTML5 goodies, a dynamically updatable UI</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/06/netflix-ported-webkit-to-the-ps3-to-enable-html5-goodies-a-dyna/#comment-108264766</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Google TV is as useless as the plot in a porn film.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2010 09:19:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: FCC to address net neutrality on December 21st</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/01/fcc-to-address-net-neutrality-on-december-21st/#comment-105704987</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Why? They already understand that building a perfectly suppressive system is impossible. I guarantee that the Feds get more actionable intelligence BECAUSE of the openness of the Internet.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:51:58 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: FCC to address net neutrality on December 21st</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/01/fcc-to-address-net-neutrality-on-december-21st/#comment-105704435</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Suppression never works over the long term. Anyone in China who wants access to the real Internet can get it. Our government and law enforcement understand that suppression tactics will force the creation of methods of accessing the Inteernet that can't be easily monitored.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;You are a complete rube.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:49:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: FCC to address net neutrality on December 21st</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/01/fcc-to-address-net-neutrality-on-december-21st/#comment-105703581</link><description>&lt;p&gt;This is nonsense. The definition of Net Neutrality is standard. ISPs are the ones who muddied the waters. Creating various "definitions" for NN was a tactic by opposers of NN to weaken its argument.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 17:46:08 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: FCC to address net neutrality on December 21st</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/01/fcc-to-address-net-neutrality-on-december-21st/#comment-105511418</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The only idiots I'm seeing here are you and Brian with your non-sensical paranoid delusions. The government stands to gain more from a free and open Internet than a closed one. The best way to know what someone is thinking is to give them OPEN access to information and monitor what they choose.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;You guys are also not taking into accounts that ISPs all over the world can take the same stance as American ISPs and charge for access to their networks.  Then what do you think will happen?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;You may want to adjust your tin foil hat.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:30:33 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: FCC to address net neutrality on December 21st</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/01/fcc-to-address-net-neutrality-on-december-21st/#comment-105509896</link><description>&lt;p&gt;The government has the power to effectively monitor the Internet right now. And it stands to gain more by allowing people to have whatever access they want and keeping tabs on them than controlling their access to information. If I'm the Feds, I don't shut out access to "&lt;a href="http://www.iluvalquaeda.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="www.iluvalquaeda.com"&gt;www.iluvalquaeda.com&lt;/a&gt;.," I leave it open to everyone to monitor who is going there.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you are going to be paranoid delusional, at least try to have some common sense.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:23:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: FCC to address net neutrality on December 21st</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/01/fcc-to-address-net-neutrality-on-december-21st/#comment-105507734</link><description>&lt;p&gt;That's utter nonsense. And, for that matter, the U.S. Is borderline fascist at this point. Our "free market" is grossly skewed. I notice that "free marketers" never lobby for the removal of the thousands of laws that enable corporations to commoditize the workforce and undermine collective bargaining, which is a capitalistic by nature.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Comcast has a virtual if not actual monopoly in many markets. If capitalism was operating effectively, the cost of cable would be dropping not skyrocketing.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:15:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: FCC to address net neutrality on December 21st</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/01/fcc-to-address-net-neutrality-on-december-21st/#comment-105505599</link><description>&lt;p&gt;This has nothing to do with the Feds. Net Neutrality is simply a concept to ensure that all Internet traffic is treated equally with just enough QoS to keep everything running smoothly.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Opposing Net Neutrality is like opposing free speech. People who oppose Net Neutrality also don't seem to understand that tiering of Internet traffic won't only be done by our own ISPs, the concept can be extended across the entire Internet. That means that countries like China could charge American companies for access to their networks. The Internet could effectively be "Balkanized" if tiering and specialized networks that compete directly with the Internet are created.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Opposition to Net Neutrality is paranoid and short-sighted. It is a subject that should not be politicized. "Free marketers" need to take into account that what's good for the goose is good for the gander.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 09:06:25 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: FCC to address net neutrality on December 21st</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/01/fcc-to-address-net-neutrality-on-december-21st/#comment-105503159</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Bend over and say "arrrrrrgh!"&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 08:55:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Dell Venue Pro finally available to order: $99 on contract, shipping December 9th</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/12/01/dell-venue-pro-finally-available-to-order-99-on-contract-ship/#comment-105501773</link><description>&lt;p&gt;My next phone.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 08:48:39 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Fiji Water Announces Shutdown. World Freaks?</title><link>http://motherjones.com/node/88906#comment-104949464</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm witcha mayne.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Nov 2010 21:55:17 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Fiji Water Announces Shutdown. World Freaks?</title><link>http://motherjones.com/node/88906#comment-104948759</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I say good riddance to Fiji Water. When FW leaves, someone else will just step in. The water will flow.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Nov 2010 21:53:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Microsoft in talks to start new TV service using the 360?</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/29/microsoft-in-talks-to-start-new-tv-service-using-the-360/#comment-104708179</link><description>&lt;p&gt;"Apple and Google are waging an assault..."&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;On what, relevance? I'd rather use an X360 or PS3 for my IPTV needs than an Apple TV or Google TV. As always, the only comp MS has is Sony. Apple TV and Google TV are dead in the water.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Nov 2010 10:49:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Editorial: My next iPad won't be a 7-incher, but I wish it could be</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/24/dnpdnpeditorial-will-apples-next-ipad-compete-on-price-or-feat/#comment-103659603</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Writer by Information Architects for the iPad is awesome. You CAN do serious writing on the iPad.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 26 Nov 2010 19:17:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Editorial: My next iPad won't be a 7-incher, but I wish it could be</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/24/dnpdnpeditorial-will-apples-next-ipad-compete-on-price-or-feat/#comment-103657795</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Atom = netbook&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;No one calls anything with a Core 2 a netbook. Just sayin.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 26 Nov 2010 19:03:49 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Editorial: My next iPad won't be a 7-incher, but I wish it could be</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/24/dnpdnpeditorial-will-apples-next-ipad-compete-on-price-or-feat/#comment-103654220</link><description>&lt;p&gt;"I'd settle for eight."&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;That's what SHE said.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Still not sure about a 7 inch iPad, though it works well for the Kindle 3 which has overall dimensions similar to a Galaxy Pad. I like both my Kindle 3 and iPad. I think I'd rather have greater resolution than a smaller size. But, if Apple can get a Retina display on a 7", I'd buy that in a minute.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 26 Nov 2010 18:52:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Scenes from the Democratic Commiseration Club</title><link>http://motherjones.com/node/88666#comment-102262245</link><description>&lt;p&gt;You didn't get the notice? Bush isn't a "real" Republican.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Don't you know that conservatives move the goalposts when they run up the tab?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 24 Nov 2010 21:02:34 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Scenes from the Democratic Commiseration Club</title><link>http://motherjones.com/node/88666#comment-102257825</link><description>&lt;p&gt;That means that the overwhelming majority of Canadians work for someone else. I guess no one has informed you of the poor statistical odds of creating a successful business either.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 24 Nov 2010 20:55:34 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: HTC and Samsung license entire Intellectual Ventures patent portfolio, gear up for war</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/23/htc-and-samsung-license-entire-intellectual-ventures-patent-port/#comment-101459704</link><description>&lt;p&gt;This is like making a shield out of toilet paper. What's Apple's market cap again? How much cash do they hold right now?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Apple's going to go after both of these companies so hard they are going to need IVs when it is done. Apple has money and time on it's side. HTC will go down first, SAmsung will capitulate and license Apple technology.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2010 20:30:04 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: This Too Shall Pass...</title><link>http://www.rahulsood.com/2010/11/this-too-shall-pass.html#comment-101059420</link><description>&lt;p&gt;To be honest, I was kind of stunned by the news. But I also felt that it was inevitable. HP gave up on the Voodoo brand too soon. The market may have changed but the Voodoo brand still had power. The brand would have allowed HP to take risks that could have yielded the Next Big Thing. It was shortsighted on the part of the leadership at HP to kill the brand. When that happened, I knew it was just a matter of time.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I could have lied to you and sucked up but I respected you enough to give you my honest assessments. I may not have always presented them in the most tactful way but I meant them with the utmost respect. I hope you and your family continue to prosper.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 22 Nov 2010 23:14:29 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Verizon proposes wholesale rewrite of US telecom law</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/22/verizon-proposes-wholesale-rewrite-of-us-telecom-law/#comment-101055568</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Gotta love these guys. What happens when other ISPs and even whole nations decide to tier and stratify the Internet? An Internet HOV lane for the wealthy looks great now but what happens when China decides that American companies need to pay to reach its people? If VZ can charge for premium bandwidth, what's to keep whole other countries from doing the same thing? Let's see how great of an idea stratifying the Internet is when American packets start to get throttled abroad.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 22 Nov 2010 22:51:52 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Visualized: iOS has more games than three generations of consoles</title><link>http://www.engadget.com/2010/11/17/visualized-ios-has-more-games-than-three-generations-of-console/#comment-100871790</link><description>&lt;p&gt;That chart would be reversed if the criteria was QUALITY games.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Maingauche</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 22 Nov 2010 16:56:16 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>